MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1528027774

Regional cooperation in energy efficiency standard-setting and labeling in North America

2003· article· en· W1528027774 on OpenAlex
Stephen Wiel, Laura Van Wie McGrory

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas) · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSilkworms and Sericulture Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsEfficient energy useHarmonizationTest (biology)Energy policyEnergy (signal processing)BusinessEnvironmental economicsPolitical scienceEnvironmental protectionInternational tradeEngineeringEconomicsGeographyRenewable energy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The North American Energy Working Group (NAEWG) was established in 2001 by the governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. The goals of NAEWG are to foster communication and cooperation on energy-related matters of common interest, and to enhance North American energy trade and interconnections consistent with the goal of sustainable development, for the benefit of all three countries. At its outset, NAEWG established teams to address different aspects of the energy sector. One, the Energy Efficiency Expert Group, undertook activity in three areas: (1) analyzing commonalities and differences in the test procedures of Canada, Mexico, and the United States, and identifying specific products for which the three countries might consider harmonization; (2) exploring possibilities for increased mutual recognition of laboratory test results; and (3) looking at possibilities for enhanced cooperation in the Energy Star voluntary endorsement labeling program. To support NAEWG's Expert Group on Energy Efficiency (NAEWG-EE), USDOE commissioned Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, representing the Collaborative Labeling and Appliance Standards Program (CLASP), to prepare a resource document comparing current standards, labels, and test procedure regulations in Canada, Mexico, and the United States. The resulting document identified 46 energy-using products for which at least one of the three countries has energy efficiency regulations. Three products--refrigerators/freezers, room air conditioners, and integral horsepower three-phase electric motors--have identical minimum energy performance standards (MEPS) and test procedures in the three countries. Ten other products have different MEPS and test procedures, but have the near-term potential for harmonization. NAEWG-EE is currently working to identify mechanisms for mutual recognition of test results. With consultative support from the United States and Canada through NAEWG-EE, Mexico is exploring possibilities for extending the Energy Star endorsement label to Mexico.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.169
Teacher spread0.159 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it